| |
Subject |
Author |
Date Posted |
Forum
|
 |
RE: Favorable developments from waiting
A few months ago, I posted some problems I was having with my Onan Generator, and another problem with the rear-end differential making popping noises.
For the Onan generator, as suggested, I ran a couple cans of SeaFoam through it. It helped a little on the surging but it still surged.
For the rear-end differential, as suggested by Dodge, we changed the rear end fluid, and added the required friction modifier (Mopar brand). It helped a little, but it still made noise.
To solve the generator, it was going to require it to be removed, and carburator replaced, so I estimated an easy $500
To solve the rear-end, it was going to require a new center section, installed and all was estimated to be around $1500
Not wanting to give up $2000 in repairs, I waited. Drove it anyway.
About 1,000 miles later....
No more surging on the generator!!
No more rear end noise!!
So, I drive on .... :)
We also found that the Seafoam works the best when it gets a chance to sit in the Onan. We got ours going (it was very bad) by running it with Seafoam for 1/2 hour, letting it sit a day, repeat, repeat, repeat. It now works very well, and we keep the gas in it preserved with Seafoam.
|
booster
|
03/30/12 11:31am |
Class B - Camping Van Conversions
|
|
RE: Roof waxing/polishing - how to
Tape styrofoam insulation to the ladder and lean it on the van. We use an 8" step ladder that way and it works great. I am not tall, but I can reach the entire roof.
|
booster
|
03/17/12 09:07pm |
Class B - Camping Van Conversions
|
|
RE: 2007 RT170--Issues with low front plastic "bumper"
We don't have the clearance problem, as we have lifted our C190P two inches, but we will be doing some things to the front air dam. I intend on plugging up the openings in the center of the dam, to limit the air entering under the van. I will leave the outboard openings to allow air to the brakes, as it will mostly exit out the front wheelwells anyway. At the same time I am going to block all the bypasses in the radiator area which allow air to go out the bottom and around the sides of the radiator instead of through it. Hopefully, it will improve the cooling and maybe the handling a bit.
|
booster
|
03/13/12 12:19pm |
Class B - Camping Van Conversions
|
|
RE: Follow-up to 12V TV Solution for LTV FreeSpirit
There should be no problems.
Take my word for it.
No thank you :B
|
booster
|
03/09/12 06:52pm |
Class B - Camping Van Conversions
|
|
RE: Follow-up to 12V TV Solution for LTV FreeSpirit
You missed what was said about the tv in question. The TV as purchased was 110 volt ac, with a wall brick to convert it to 12v DC, which plugged into the TV. What wasn't know was whether or not the voltage regulation and protection was in the brick that wasn't used. Repeat, this was not a 12 volt device designed for vehicle use.
|
booster
|
03/09/12 12:10pm |
Class B - Camping Van Conversions
|
|
RE: Follow-up to 12V TV Solution for LTV FreeSpirit
There should be no problems.
Read the original thread and note the amperage is not an issue.
Power supplies are regulated --- they put out only as much power is needed.
There is no issue of "too much amperage".
Too much voltage, yes.
The device will not draw excess amps unless there is a short --- that is what fuses are for.
I hope you fused the 12V connection properly.
In the original thread, the question was not about amperage, it was about the wide range of voltage the TV would see running directly off the 12 volts of the vehicle. 11-16 volts is very possible. That model of TV has its voltage power supply of 12v created in a wall brick, so it was unknown if there was any other voltage regulation inside the cabinet, or if the higher voltage would hurt it.
It is good news that it worked out for you. We have ours (same tv) on a stabilizer, and it, too is working well. The same model that we have in the house died, though, and had to go in for warranty repair. So much for clean power.
|
booster
|
03/09/12 09:39am |
Class B - Camping Van Conversions
|
|
RE: Bilstein steering stabilizer
I think they now have a big rear sway bar available for the Excels. That would probably give you as much, or more, benefit than the stabilizer.
|
booster
|
03/09/12 08:34am |
Class B - Camping Van Conversions
|
|
RE: Convert a 15 pass Ford E van to a B & TT tower - Thoughts?
No pictures!
I am 1/2 way through a laminate job, and have just tore up the back to redo the design for equipment!
In process are, by far, the best pics for others who are planning similar things. We all know it won't look finished, but it will be easier to see how it is being built.
Would like to see it hooked up with the trailer for traveling, too. You must have some pics from past trips.
|
booster
|
03/04/12 05:51pm |
Class B - Camping Van Conversions
|
|
RE: Convert a 15 pass Ford E van to a B & TT tower - Thoughts?
The critical issue is the moment arm from the trailer hitch to the center of the rear axle.
That length is not materially different from the Suburban.
If a weight distributing hitch is used, it is not an issue.
A larger issue of the length of the moment arm and handling is there --- but it is no different from towing any trailer.
We are talking about a 9500# fully loaded 1 ton van, not a Suburban, which according to the numbers looks better on moment arm anyway. The Chevy van has much less overhang, so we compare to a Suburban?
You are also discounting the wheel base distance, which, when longer, increases directional stability, which really helps when towing.
The problems are well documented on this, and other boards, so the OP needs to consider them.
|
booster
|
03/04/12 10:46am |
Class B - Camping Van Conversions
|
|
RE: Convert a 15 pass Ford E van to a B & TT tower - Thoughts?
The maximum towing weight of the E-350 long wheelbase with the 6.0 diesel is 10,000 lbs.
With the V10, it is 9,400lbs.
There is no issue with the length of the van as long as normal loading / weight distribution issues are addressed.
In fact, I just had a look, and the extended van overhang is about the same, if not shorter than the overhang on a Suburban --- one of the most common tow vehicles.
Plenty of good Trailers for 4 people for under 7,000 lbs.
I derate factory towing capacity by about 30% to get to my "comfort zone".
Extended Ford E350 138" wheel base with 236" overall length
Extended Chevy Express 155" wheelbase with 244" overall length.
Suburban 3/4 ton 130" wheelbase with 224" overall
Significant difference.
The handling issues with the Fords has been discussed here extensively, so it is hardly an non issue. Chevies have had very few handling complaints.
When folks have done the calculations on trailers, with the factory built class Bs, they have found the tongue weight to kill them, going over GVWR for the van. Some will pull 5K, most try to stay at 3500, form what I have seen. You can get a decent trailer in that weight range, but it will not be huge.
|
booster
|
03/04/12 09:27am |
Class B - Camping Van Conversions
|
|
RE: Convert a 15 pass Ford E van to a B & TT tower - Thoughts?
I think there is a good chance you would go over weight with that much trailer, plus the Ford has a long rear overhang, so the tongue weight and trailer could make it a handful. A Chevy is a bit better as the wheelbase on the extended vans is longer than the Fords, if you don't mind a Chevy.
|
booster
|
03/03/12 09:15pm |
Class B - Camping Van Conversions
|
 |
RE: I had to do it, I had to Block a members posts.
Even more bewildering, this Roger was a moderator?
Yup... for years... back when the B forum was truly busy. Helpful of him to start this thread because most of us probably didn't even know that this was possible.
And now I think I will do the same. Thanks Rodger!
I agree that is good to be able to block, and would much rather see people block someone than to have them see the posts and feel obligated to refute them, or leave the board because of inane posts or conflicts.
P.S Rodger was an excellent moderator, doing a very tough job.
|
booster
|
03/01/12 11:13am |
Class B - Camping Van Conversions
|
|
RE: I figured out the truth today.
You didn't mention the price?, if it was really that great you could just clean the interior and live with it?
I drive a 92 Sierra with holes in the body.
$22,500.
Here is a low mile 200 Versatile on e-bay for under 20K
200V
|
booster
|
02/27/12 12:09pm |
Class B - Camping Van Conversions
|
|
RE: foam or memory foam?
We found memory foam to be to hot and too confining(it surrounds you too tightly, it is hard to roll over). The mattress we had made for our permanent bed in the 07 C190P Roadtrek is 5" of medium firm Tatalay latex, and is way more comfortable than our bed at home (which will be replaced with foam shortly).
|
booster
|
02/23/12 04:27pm |
Class B - Camping Van Conversions
|
|
RE: CCA on a battery
It is interesting that the simple question of asking for objective definition and useful empirical measure generates such scorn ....
re: "I totally agree, although I am sure Bryan will be back in with "no such thing as a true deep cycle battery"." -- not what I assert. What I do is to ask for a definition to match the label that has use to an RVer looking to purchase a battery. Does that label mean a longer warranty? Not that I can see. Does it indicate a greater energy density? Not that I can see. Why is it that such a simple question only gets this sort of comment and no productive response?Folks have repeatedly given you definitions of "true deep cycle" batteries, but you refuse to accept them. Last time I looked, warranties didn't determine the type of battery, so what do you mean? Energy density is also not a valid point, as it is the durability at the intended usage that is the major factor in style of battery. Your responses don't relate to the issues. You have consistently denied that what others (including mfgs) define as a true deep cycle battery has any benefit in the RV world.
re: "So Bryan, just how do you use your batteries to not take them below 50%?" -- what I suggest you do is to head over to http://www.smartgauge.co.uk/ and look through Chris's technical documents for the analysis regarding the optimum discharge cycle depth for best cost effectiveness. Then consider the reserve requirements necessary for RV use. Then take a look at the available battery energy capacity compared to the variables involved and usage patterns to gain some insight into why RV use profiles generally involve cycle depths much less than 50% SoC.Impressive diatribe, but you again totally ignored the the question. I have done all those calculations, and that is how I know many, many, folks would have to make major camping style concessions that are not really necessary. I just want to know how you do it.
re: "on another thread, you just stated that driving for many (100+) hours with full batteries seeing 14.1+ volts would not affect battery life. If that was the case, you wouldn't need a multistep charger other times. So what do you think about the high voltage while driving, and what do you do about it." -- I sure wish some folks would think first and respond later .... Consider, for example, how many TT folks have batteries connected in parallel with the engine batteries while on the road; why it is that engine batteries usually have much better warranties than house batteries, and the precision required for battery charging. So I should think about what you said on the other thread, OK, just did, and that is what you said. Sure trailer folks may be disconnected from the alternator (or not), but they don't get charged while driving then, and must find a place to plug in, or they will, God forbid, go under 50% SOC. How do you handle that when booddocking? But you must consider a lot of motorhomes do connect to the alternator while driving. This is a real problem, and you can't just say it doesn't exist, because you don't want to answer the question. As to warranties, they mean pretty much nothing, as most are sales gimmicks. They count on you losing the paperwork before the battery fails. Any battery that is cycled deeper is going to have a shorter life. Your house batteries go way deeper than the starting battery, which should have very shallow discharges, and is designed to handle higher voltage better (not well) than deep cycles are (different lead compound).
|
booster
|
02/13/12 12:15pm |
Beginning RVing
|
|
RE: RT Front End Lift - Fiasco
Wow, Senf, hitting the shock would be a lot of bowing. What did Otto-max say about it. They seem to be straight up folks, and certainly should have the most useful experience in things like this.
Our van is sitting on the stands right now, so it was a good time to get some pics.
Here is what the spring looks like with it hanging free (full extension, stopped by the shock).
http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m299/turbobooster/Roadtrek%20bed/more%20Roadtrek/Springunloaded.jpg
And here is what it looks like with close to normal weight on it.
http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m299/turbobooster/Roadtrek%20bed/more%20Roadtrek/Springloaded.jpg
Unloaded there is more bow than loaded, by quite a bit, and the further you compress the suspension with bumps or load, the bow will get less, as the control arm gets closer to parallel to the upper spring mount.
Too bad your guy didn't take a pic or two, I am sure Otto-max would be very interested to see what happens.
|
booster
|
02/11/12 02:52pm |
Class B - Camping Van Conversions
|
|
RE: RT Front End Lift - Fiasco
From what I have seen, a lot of front coil springs bow out a little. The way the A arms rotate on their pivots keep them from staying parallel. Was he looking at them in the unloaded, fully extended position? If so, that could be considerably less aligned than in the compressed condition, especially if the shock was still disconnected. There are quite a few of the 1617s out there without problem, as far as I know. but I haven't heard of any 1618's.
If they wanted to do a softer spring, that still gave the full 2" lift, I think it would have to be considerable longer than a stock spring. This would make it so it would have to be installed with a spring compressor, if there was enough room for the added coils of the taller spring. That might be an interesting question to ask Otto-max, as then you could keep the same spring rate as stock, but still get the lift.
|
booster
|
02/10/12 07:53am |
Class B - Camping Van Conversions
|
|
RE: RT Front End Lift - Fiasco
On ours, we found them to be better than the originals for ride. I have heard others say they were harsh, but that was not the case with ours. On small bumps, we found them to be about the same, and on big bumps, much smoother because the suspension didn't bottom out on the bump stops. When we put on the Bilsteins, it smoothed out the small bumps, and stiffened up the big ones. When all was said and done, we are smoother on small bumps by a bit, with also an improvement in comfort on the rest of the bumps, except very large ones, which the Bilsteins stiffen up for added control. We have been very happy with the ride, and I think we have had ours the longest time (not longest miles) of those that have done them. We haven't tried it yet, but the higher rate springs in the front, and the swaybar in the back, should increase the front traction enough to allow us to drop our front tire pressure a bit, which will give an even smoother ride. We run 65psi now, and will probably try 60 and see how handles.
Our springs were pretty much identical in length as the stock ones, but with more coils and much bigger diameter wire.
|
booster
|
02/09/12 07:22pm |
Class B - Camping Van Conversions
|
|
RE: Fedex non-Sprinter
Maybe you saw one of FedEx's new energy efficient trucks:
FedEx Adds More Than 4,000 New, Fuel Efficient Vehicles
or one of these:
Maxx Automotive
Definitely not the electrics, but it did look a lot like the Ultramax in the link, and they mention Fedex and it being a replacement for Sprinters.
Upfitted by Turtletop on Ford or GM. Very remindful of the Roatrek 200, but with dual wheels. It sure looks like that it would be an interesting starting point for do it yourself version.
|
booster
|
02/09/12 11:45am |
Class B - Camping Van Conversions
|
|
RE: Fedex non-Sprinter
Probably a route or load that required more room. I've seen every size Fedex delivery vehicle in my neighborhood from a van to an extended box truck
As have I, but I have not seen a Sprinter size van that was not a Sprinter in a long, long time.
|
booster
|
02/09/12 11:22am |
Class B - Camping Van Conversions
|
|
